The Electoral College Should Be Abolished

The system allows for the voices of the people to be heard through the popular vote and have elected officials make educated decisions based on the opinions of the nation’s citizens. However, the way the Electoral college is set up makes it possible for a candidate to be elected president without the majority of the popular vote (U.S. Electoral College). The combination of the controversial nature of the College and the differing opinions of U.S. citizens leads to a question being asked: Is the Electoral College damaging to the democratic system in United States, or is it a pivotal extension of our democracy? While some U.S. citizens feel that the Electoral College should be abolished, there are those who feel the system plays a key role in our Presidential election.

Electoral college has been with us since the birth of the constitution, and to this day we are still using this type of system to this day. The Electoral College is a system that the United States uses to elect our upcoming presidents and vice presidents. Each state has electors equal to their senate member and house of representatives, however who ever gets the highest popular vote in the state gets the electoral vote. The issue is the Electoral College do not give votes to the people, but to the states. Which has some unfair consequences.

Several years after the United States came to be, the Constitutional Convention met to determine how the new nation should govern itself. The delegates saw that it was crucial to have a president and vice president, but the delegates did not want these offices to reflect how the colonies were treated under the British rule. The delegates believed that the president’s power should be limited, and that he should be chosen through the system known as the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a body of people who represent the states of the US, who formally cast votes for the electing of the president and vice president. Many citizens feel that the Electoral College goes against our nation’s principle of representative democracy, while others

One great way to deal with factions is by having a government that knows how to control and deal with their effects. Madison believes that a republic can do that job better than a democracy, because a democracy is a small society of people who can not admit there is a cure to factions. He believes that a large republic would work out well for the States, because a larger government causes less negative impacts on the people, even though all of the people won’t be known, the government won’t be too centralized and only focused on the

Since 1789, the process in which the President of the United States was to be selected was established in the United States Constitution. Article II of the Constitution determines that the President will not be determined by popular vote, but rather by the Electoral College. The Electoral College is comprised of 538 electors. This number is determined by the amount of Senators and House Representatives each state has. When voters vote, they are not voting for president.

Because of this, to make it fair they made it so that the senate would have equal vote no matter what. Each state would have one vote no matter the population. This heavily favored the small states because now they would have equal votes with the bigger states. This compromise guarded against tyranny. First, this prevented bigger states from becoming powerhouses and dominating everything within Congress.

They would instead offer different reasons as to what makes America great and not so great, for example; many people on either side would believe that the US is a Democracy, well I can tell you that the US is both a Democracy and a Republic. Democracy by definition is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. Sometimes referred to as "rule of the majority. A Republic or in our case a Constitutional Republic is defined as a state where the officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens. Now the US being both offers us the benefits and freedoms of both systems, making us technically a Democratic Constitutional

Another important part of democracy is voting. However, if we do not register, we can not vote. Barnhart states that “People are registering to vote… They are actually casting that vote, too.” (Barnhart online.) As we can see, people care about democracy as they are willing to take the time to register to vote and then cast their vote. In the end, we can see that people care for democracy and actually care for

Through this United, State voters have been made to believe that they can find a candidate that might not grab their interest easily. Two party system provides Americans with a stable balance of accommodating varied interests and opinions. Because each party consists of organized groups and individuals voters, it becomes necessary to consider a broad range of interest and opinions when making political decisions. Two party system has also assisted American in discouraging sudden shift in political trends which threatens government stability. In the case of any disagreement by the public, they will remain patient has in a shorter duration they might try another candidate’s policies from the different political since a two party system tends to roll on a short term trend

The only changes that would make the Third Party viable would probably be to make the system Parliamentary. What we have now is a “Winner take all system,” which represents our democracy. Parliament is highly unlikely since our founders chose a completely different system. With a system of voting by two-thirds in it allows elected officials the power to change or not change the law. The advantage of a two parties system is a strong central government and constant pressure toward the center.